Background Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) aims to overcome some of the technical challenges faced when operating on mid and low rectal cancers. Specimen quality has been confirmed previously, but recent concerns have been raised about oncological safety. This multicentre prospective study aimed to evaluate the safety of taTME among early adopters in Australia and New Zealand. Methods Data from all consecutive patients who had taTME for rectal cancer from July 2014 to February 2020 at six tertiary referral centres in Australasia were recorded and analysed. Results A total of 308 patients of median age of 64 years underwent taTME. Some 75.6 per cent of patients were men, and the median BMI was 26.8 kg/m2. The median distance of tumour from anal verge was 7 cm. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was administered to 57.8 per cent of patients. The anastomotic leak rate was 8.1 per cent and there was no mortality within 30 days of surgery. Pathological examination found a complete mesorectum in 295 patients (95.8 per cent), a near-complete mesorectum in seven patients (2.3 per cent), and an incomplete mesorectum in six patients (1.9 per cent). The circumferential resection margin and distal resection margin was involved in nine patients (2.9 per cent), and two patients (0.6 per cent) respectively. Over a median follow-up of 22 months, the local recurrence rate was 1.9 per cent and median time to local recurrence was 30.5 months. Conclusion This study showed that, with appropriate training and supervision, skilled minimally invasive rectal cancer surgeons can perform taTME with similar pathological and oncological results to open and laparoscopic surgery.
Background and Objectives:Hybrid-natural orifice surgery combines the advantages of traditional transabdominal laparoscopic surgery, while limiting surgical trauma to the abdominal wall. Among various routes of intra-abdominal access, the transvaginal method is most appealing because of its utility and proven safety. We describe a series of 4 colonic resections performed with this approach, combined with minilaparoscopy and needlescopic approaches, and discuss the technical aspects, efficacy, and applicability of this technique.Methods:Three patients were selected to undergo hybrid transvaginal natural-orifice right hemicolectomy. A fourth patient, who underwent a segmental resection of a splenic flexure carcinoma, was included. Transvaginal port access was obtained via posterior colpotomy, and was used for dissection, vascular ligation, bowel division, and anastomosis. We used a combination of standard laparoscopic, minilaparoscopic, and needlescopic instruments transabdominally, focusing on reduced size and number of access points.Results:Duration of laparoscopy, oncologic outcomes and rate of operative morbidity were comparable to the published literature. Early return of gastrointestinal function and low analgesic requirements was observed in all patients. No morbidity related to transvaginal access was observed and the procedure was performed without difficulty in all cases.Conclusion:Colonic resection performed by hybrid natural-orifice technique offers several advantages over purely transabdominal laparoscopic procedures. Transvaginal access is easy to perform and offers excellent safety, efficacy, and versatility, especially for right hemicolectomy. Techniques to reduce abdominal wall surgical trauma, such as minilaparoscopy and needlescopic graspers, can be combined effectively in colonic resections, and may act synergistically to reduce postoperative pain and improve outcomes.
Background Recently, the number of prehabilitation trials has increased significantly. The identification of key research priorities is vital in guiding future research directions. Thus, the aim of this collaborative study was to define key research priorities in prehabilitation for patients undergoing cancer surgery. Methods The Delphi methodology was implemented over three rounds of surveys distributed to prehabilitation experts from across multiple specialties, tumour streams and countries via a secure online platform. In the first round, participants were asked to provide baseline demographics and to identify five top prehabilitation research priorities. In successive rounds, participants were asked to rank research priorities on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was considered if > 70% of participants indicated agreement on each research priority. Results A total of 165 prehabilitation experts participated, including medical doctors, physiotherapists, dieticians, nurses, and academics across four continents. The first round identified 446 research priorities, collated within 75 unique research questions. Over two successive rounds, a list of 10 research priorities reached international consensus of importance. These included the efficacy of prehabilitation on varied postoperative outcomes, benefit to specific patient groups, ideal programme composition, cost efficacy, enhancing compliance and adherence, effect during neoadjuvant therapies, and modes of delivery. Conclusions This collaborative international study identified the top 10 research priorities in prehabilitation for patients undergoing cancer surgery. The identified priorities inform research strategies, provide future directions for prehabilitation research, support resource allocation and enhance the prehabilitation evidence base in cancer patients undergoing surgery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.